If the Incredible Hulk looked like an Anglo Saxon plumber, he'd look like Craig's Bond. Shallow or not shallow, couldn't they have found someone that looked remotely James Bond? I dunno, at least cast someone with brown hair and moderate good looks. James Bond is supposed to be handsome and Craig does not evoke that look. He's not ugly (in real life) but as Bond I find him downright hideous! How he ever got the part...!!!!! Barbara Broccoli needs an eyetest. I don't care if he's a good actor, he's got to look the part too!

Yeah alright he doesn't get you excited downstairs, fantastic, welcome to 2006. How exactly does Roger Moore look like Sean Connery? What is the part supposed to look like? Sorry, you're talking nonsense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown

Yeah, it's growing on me a lot more since hearing it in full, and I do like the strings, very dramatic. Not the kind of song I'd listen to normally but in the context of Bond it's pretty perfect.

It's still ... okay. The mix just seems really off to me, like the wrong instruments are being given the most clarity. If that makes any sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: porntrooper

The 007 Legends titles are pretty nifty though... I enjoyed that.

To bad it's just going to be more garbage from Activision. Blood Stone was useless.

Bond's 'death' is not faked, it's a fuck up, pure and simple. M isn't ordering Bond shot, but the death of the man he is fighting and the shot only clips Bond, but being clipped a by bullet still bringa da pain.

Other 00 agents are wiped out too, nobody knows what the jeez is going on, Bond is believed to be truly dead, and his existence as a 'ghost' (in hiding, believing he is being 'burned' by MI6) gives him an outsiders view of the situation, atrocities happening, authorities in panic, and news of OOs being taken out in apparently organised fashion brings him back into the world. As far as HMSS is concerned, it's a mysterious and unexplainable series of catastrophes causing such panic among the public and those supposedly in the know, it's as if the sky is falling...from the outside Bond can see the picture more clearly, it's not the sky falling, it's tactical, clinical,the GROUND beneath the feet of the establishment is falling, being taken out. Only someone with the ruthlessness to do what has to be done can hope to be a blunt enough instrument to hurt those responsible

A mistake in M's past, accidently/inadvertently/avoidably throwing Silva to the wolves (Silva,or the man who came to become known as Silva, perhaps a grim joke on his part due to other Bond Villains names, White, Green, Gold, so he gives Q(uantum) Branch a name that is the kind of thing they're used to).

His revenge is a long time coming, and when he makes his move his opponent turns out to be Bond, raw from the belief that M ordered him shot, not believing her fully that it was an accident, doing his thing for Queen and country, up against someone with his training, his ruthlessness, his devil may care attitude who (Joker Like) knows the best way to screw with the establishment is to cause mayhem, mayhem that seems to be part of a campaign, but without offering any clue as to why.

Such a situation invokes the 'Skyfall' protocol, which is an admission of absolute failure by the intelligence services re planning and counter terrorism strategy and as part of he Skyfall protocol the licence to kill comes into its own. Women, kids, men, innocent or not, no life is held valuable enough to prevent the attempt to sort the situation out, by any means necessary, because no life is valuable enough to be considered worth the price of the collapse of a sovereign state.

The skyfall protocol may be invoked twice, to take out those responsible for the chain of events, the first time those taken out are bad guys, but planted clues have led to them appearing responsible, when they are not. The second time, Bond's personal invoking of skyfall, to be the one man army who will kill his way to the truth.

The closer he gets to the truth, the more his mind is twisted by Silva so that he almost wants M dead as much as Silva. M is the one responsible for the chain of events and her death will stop the chaos, whoever kills her, Silva gets the word out to that effect.

To keep M safe, she is transported by trusted personnel, only just trusted anyway, to a bolthole, a mansion in a remote location that has jokingly been referred to for years as Skyfall Manor, due to the circumstances under which someone would be taken there. M is betrayed, and a kill team is sent to 'Skyfall Manor' to take out M and anyone else they find there.

Bond gets there first, a terrified M is convinced she is about to be killed by him, everyone else has turned against her, why wouldn't he? But the look in his eyes tells her different, he's her protector, not her assassin, losing composure she thanks him and asks him what the hell is going on...

Bond: It's a bit...complicated. But right now, what you need to know is very simple. Some men are coming here to kill us. We're going to kill them first.

Here endeth the ramblings!

Inspired, genius, mad and poetic - pure Jobloffski

Nice observation on the colour coded names and possible link to Q(uantum) branch!

My feeling is that 'Skyfall' is merely Silva's plan to crush SIS (MI6)..."think on your sins"...what sins? Is he SIS and M's reckoning? The hard drive containing the names of every embedded intelligence officer (not 'agents' remember) has been lost thus exposing the identity of every undercover officer. Silva's 'skyfall' is merely a 'hammer-down' protocol to target SIS wherever it is and bring it to its knees. As you alluded to this is an attack on the establishment..think on what Silva says "England (or rather Britain)...the empire..MI6..so old fashioned" there's an explosion on top of SIS HQ, London comes under attack and coffins draped with the Union Jack are piling up.

Then again Bond is interrogated in his 'de-brief' and when quizzed on "Skyfall" responds quite hesitantly with the word "done". So it's a purge of some kind? It might be a bit 'on-the-nose' to coin a phrase here but it could be the hard drive with all the names of the SIS officers including 007's. Or perhaps it's the protocol SIS has in place in case its officers have become compromised...they let them go. Silva did say "we're the two survivors" and of course refers to M's actions by saying "M(ommy) has been very bad". So "think on your sins" could be retribution for allowing all those officers to have been killed by whichever terrorist organisation they were embedded in.

I agree with Rgirvan, even just very mild allusions to Quantum like in the first film would suffice.

Old news for QoS superfans, but I only recently found out that there was a deleted scene involving the advisor to the PM, Guy Haines and our favourite Quantum operative, Mr White.

Apparently Mr White gets offed and this was to lead into Bond 23, but then they changed their mind as Bond 23 would be a stand alone episode and not part of the Quantum arc.

Daniel Craig is alright as Bond, though he doesn't look like a Bond (he isn't suave enough and looks pretty short as well as being blond!!!) but he is a good actor and I did love Casino Royale, though I still think QoS was mistaken as it was the most unBondian Bond film ever.

I have high hopes for Skyfall as we look like we are getting a riproaring adventure of which we haven't really had since The World is Not Enough (DAD was very silly, Casino Royale was a different type of Bond movie, which you can only do once every so often, and as I said QoS is very unlike Bond at all).

I don't want to see any spoilers so I probably won't be on much, and I will be on holiday for a week.

I hope we do see Mr White in Bond 24... it also got me thinking, after watching OHMSS, Irma Bunt is one of the few who got away... after shooting Tracy. Or maybe it was explained in one of the novels, but she isn't mentioned in DAF.

I am in hog heaven with Sky's 007 HD channel - a great move. So far I have watched Goldfinger, Dr No. The Man with the Golden Gun, Moonraker, The Spy who loved me, Live and Let Die, OHMSS, Diamonds are Forever, From Russia with Love, and Casino Royale.

I missed Octopussy earlier today but it is on at 12.25! I still can't believe how much criticism Roger Moore gets. He is brilliant! Though as a Scot I do love Sean Connery also. You can see why Bond became so popular as the way he acts in From Russia with Love and Goldfinger in particular he oozes star quality and is also a tough hombre.

Anyway, no doubt my favourite Connery film, You Only Live Twice will be on soon and I will watch it for my favourite bit when Blofeld shoots Osato! Crazily insane stuff.

Daniel Craig is alright as Bond, though he doesn't look like a Bond (he isn't suave enough and looks pretty short as well as being blond!!!) but he is a good actor and I did love Casino Royale, though I still think QoS was mistaken as it was the most unBondian Bond film ever.

I dont get the "unbond" rubbish, how exactly is it not bond like? While ive watched it a few times and it has dropped on my ratings its still a solid film. Is it the Bourne comparison that gets it? Ive seen arguments criticising the endless action, but to be fair im sure creators intended on returning to the old Bond films, which is was reminiscent of. While Bond wasnt fighting a Mr Singh on the outside of a flying plane and there were no volcano hideouts, it was still as outlandish and as entertaining as others have been.

It lacks the wit, style and dare I say it the formula which went before.

For example, Bond doesn't even get to grips with the Bond girl! The villain is the weakest ever. The pre-titles sequence is very short. The James Bond theme is hardly used (if at all during the actual movie).

There is nothing outlandish in QoS, nothing that makes you remember you watching a James Bond movie.

Yeah maybe they have tried to ape Bourne, which I feel is a mistake, which I believe they won't do with Skyfall. Bond created a new genre way back in 1962. Bond is fantasy, and when they forget that, then Bond ceases to become Bond.

James Bond is a smart arse. Everything he does should be realistic (ie done by stunt work) and never implausible, but it is unlikely that anyone can do it all consecutively, except 007.

And yes, the gadgets ARE a crucial part of Bond, and with the reintroduction of Q we will hopefully see some inspired lunacy from MI6.

Remember, many of the outlandish ideas in Fleming's books were based on crazy ideas dreamt up to beat the Nazis by SOE and Naval Intelligence.

As for Daniel Craig, he doesn't fit the 'look' of Bond, which to be fair Roger Moore didn't either. Connery, Lazenby, Dalton & Brosnan all do to an extent.

But Roger Moore made up for it as he came across as smooth, suave and debonair (in fact more so than any of the others, in my opinion). Daniel Craig seems like a labourer off a building site! When he tries to be sophisticated I just don't think it works.

He also looks very small (I am unsure of his height, he may be 6ft for all I know), but I guess that's never hurt Tom Cruise!

It lacks the wit, style and dare I say it the formula which went before.

For example, Bond doesn't even get to grips with the Bond girl! The villain is the weakest ever. The pre-titles sequence is very short. The James Bond theme is hardly used (if at all during the actual movie).

There is nothing outlandish in QoS, nothing that makes you remember you watching a James Bond movie.

Yeah maybe they have tried to ape Bourne, which I feel is a mistake, which I believe they won't do with Skyfall. Bond created a new genre way back in 1962. Bond is fantasy, and when they forget that, then Bond ceases to become Bond.

James Bond is a smart arse. Everything he does should be realistic (ie done by stunt work) and never implausible, but it is unlikely that anyone can do it all consecutively, except 007.

And yes, the gadgets ARE a crucial part of Bond, and with the reintroduction of Q we will hopefully see some inspired lunacy from MI6.

Remember, many of the outlandish ideas in Fleming's books were based on crazy ideas dreamt up to beat the Nazis by SOE and Naval Intelligence.

As for Daniel Craig, he doesn't fit the 'look' of Bond, which to be fair Roger Moore didn't either. Connery, Lazenby, Dalton & Brosnan all do to an extent.

But Roger Moore made up for it as he came across as smooth, suave and debonair (in fact more so than any of the others, in my opinion). Daniel Craig seems like a labourer off a building site! When he tries to be sophisticated I just don't think it works.

He also looks very small (I am unsure of his height, he may be 6ft for all I know), but I guess that's never hurt Tom Cruise!

Anyway, Skyfall looks pretty good.

I agree to some extent that he didn't (in CR and QoS) look like Bond yet, but that's because his Bond is in his early years as an MI6 agent. I do think though that he's the one that most looks like he could have you (collective you) in a fight.

_____________________________

Viewers of a nervous disposition may be interested to know that your television is off and I am speaking to you from inside your head...

None of the stuff that you claim absolutely has to be in a Bond movie for it to be a real Bond movie was present in Dr. No or From Russia With Love (except for the getting with the girl part, anyway). The briefcase in From Russia With Love doesn't really count as a gadget, really, does it. Nothing about either of those movies strikes me as particularly a "fantasy" at all.

It seems that Casino Royale and Quantum Of Solace actually delivered on its promise to return Bond back to his roots.

It lacks the wit, style and dare I say it the formula which went before.

For example, Bond doesn't even get to grips with the Bond girl! The villain is the weakest ever. The pre-titles sequence is very short. The James Bond theme is hardly used (if at all during the actual movie).

There is nothing outlandish in QoS, nothing that makes you remember you watching a James Bond movie.

Yeah maybe they have tried to ape Bourne, which I feel is a mistake, which I believe they won't do with Skyfall. Bond created a new genre way back in 1962. Bond is fantasy, and when they forget that, then Bond ceases to become Bond.

James Bond is a smart arse. Everything he does should be realistic (ie done by stunt work) and never implausible, but it is unlikely that anyone can do it all consecutively, except 007.

And yes, the gadgets ARE a crucial part of Bond, and with the reintroduction of Q we will hopefully see some inspired lunacy from MI6.

Remember, many of the outlandish ideas in Fleming's books were based on crazy ideas dreamt up to beat the Nazis by SOE and Naval Intelligence.

As for Daniel Craig, he doesn't fit the 'look' of Bond, which to be fair Roger Moore didn't either. Connery, Lazenby, Dalton & Brosnan all do to an extent.

But Roger Moore made up for it as he came across as smooth, suave and debonair (in fact more so than any of the others, in my opinion). Daniel Craig seems like a labourer off a building site! When he tries to be sophisticated I just don't think it works.

He also looks very small (I am unsure of his height, he may be 6ft for all I know), but I guess that's never hurt Tom Cruise!

Anyway, Skyfall looks pretty good.

I agree to some extent that he didn't (in CR and QoS) look like Bond yet, but that's because his Bond is in his early years as an MI6 agent. I do think though that he's the one that most looks like he could have you (collective you) in a fight.

And not Sean Connery? "In 1958 he had a major role in the melodrama Another Time, Another Place (1958) as a British reporter named Mark Trevor, caught in a love affair opposite Lana Turner and Barry Sullivan. During filming, star Lana Turner's possessive gangster boyfriend, Johnny Stompanato, who was visiting from Los Angeles, believed she was having an affair with Connery. He stormed onto the set and pointed a gun at Connery, only to have Connery disarm him and knock him flat on his back. Stompanato was banned from the set.[34] Connery later recounted that he had to lie low for a while after receiving threats from men linked to Stompanato's boss, Mickey Cohen."

_____________________________

Counting the minutes until the over zealous mods lock this thread too.

It lacks the wit, style and dare I say it the formula which went before.

For example, Bond doesn't even get to grips with the Bond girl! The villain is the weakest ever. The pre-titles sequence is very short. The James Bond theme is hardly used (if at all during the actual movie).

There is nothing outlandish in QoS, nothing that makes you remember you watching a James Bond movie.

Yeah maybe they have tried to ape Bourne, which I feel is a mistake, which I believe they won't do with Skyfall. Bond created a new genre way back in 1962. Bond is fantasy, and when they forget that, then Bond ceases to become Bond.

James Bond is a smart arse. Everything he does should be realistic (ie done by stunt work) and never implausible, but it is unlikely that anyone can do it all consecutively, except 007.

And yes, the gadgets ARE a crucial part of Bond, and with the reintroduction of Q we will hopefully see some inspired lunacy from MI6.

Remember, many of the outlandish ideas in Fleming's books were based on crazy ideas dreamt up to beat the Nazis by SOE and Naval Intelligence.

As for Daniel Craig, he doesn't fit the 'look' of Bond, which to be fair Roger Moore didn't either. Connery, Lazenby, Dalton & Brosnan all do to an extent.

But Roger Moore made up for it as he came across as smooth, suave and debonair (in fact more so than any of the others, in my opinion). Daniel Craig seems like a labourer off a building site! When he tries to be sophisticated I just don't think it works.

He also looks very small (I am unsure of his height, he may be 6ft for all I know), but I guess that's never hurt Tom Cruise!

Anyway, Skyfall looks pretty good.

Thats because hes definetly the shortest Bond actor.He even had to wear stacked heels in QOS so the Bond girls didnt look taller than him on screen!

_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

It lacks the wit, style and dare I say it the formula which went before.

For example, Bond doesn't even get to grips with the Bond girl! The villain is the weakest ever. The pre-titles sequence is very short. The James Bond theme is hardly used (if at all during the actual movie).

There is nothing outlandish in QoS, nothing that makes you remember you watching a James Bond movie.

Yeah maybe they have tried to ape Bourne, which I feel is a mistake, which I believe they won't do with Skyfall. Bond created a new genre way back in 1962. Bond is fantasy, and when they forget that, then Bond ceases to become Bond.

James Bond is a smart arse. Everything he does should be realistic (ie done by stunt work) and never implausible, but it is unlikely that anyone can do it all consecutively, except 007.

And yes, the gadgets ARE a crucial part of Bond, and with the reintroduction of Q we will hopefully see some inspired lunacy from MI6.

Remember, many of the outlandish ideas in Fleming's books were based on crazy ideas dreamt up to beat the Nazis by SOE and Naval Intelligence.

As for Daniel Craig, he doesn't fit the 'look' of Bond, which to be fair Roger Moore didn't either. Connery, Lazenby, Dalton & Brosnan all do to an extent.

But Roger Moore made up for it as he came across as smooth, suave and debonair (in fact more so than any of the others, in my opinion). Daniel Craig seems like a labourer off a building site! When he tries to be sophisticated I just don't think it works.

He also looks very small (I am unsure of his height, he may be 6ft for all I know), but I guess that's never hurt Tom Cruise!

Anyway, Skyfall looks pretty good.

Thats because hes definetly the shortest Bond actor.He even had to wear stacked heels in QOS so the Bond girls didnt look taller than him on screen!

And Connery had to wear an ice pack to look like he was in shape...I do not see your point.

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.

I can't wait for the shitstorm that strikes when ginger-headed Fassbender gets the role. Blood will run in the streets!

_____________________________

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

"I put no stock in religion. By the word 'religion', I have seen the lunacy of fanatics of every denomination be called 'The Will of God'. Holiness is in right action and courage on behalf of those who cannot defend themselves."

"In 1958 he had a major role in the melodrama Another Time, Another Place (1958) as a British reporter named Mark Trevor, caught in a love affair opposite Lana Turner and Barry Sullivan. During filming, star Lana Turner's possessive gangster boyfriend, Johnny Stompanato, who was visiting from Los Angeles, believed she was having an affair with Connery. He stormed onto the set and pointed a gun at Connery, only to have Connery disarm him and knock him flat on his back. Stompanato was banned from the set.[34] Connery later recounted that he had to lie low for a while after receiving threats from men linked to Stompanato's boss, Mickey Cohen."

I was a little unsure when Thomas Newman was announced as composer. I really like his work, especially on the Disney/Pixar movies, but wasnt sure it would be right for Bond. I really, really loved the scores for Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, and for the last few Brosnan movies (Goldeneye remains one of the worst Bond scores of all time). Having listened to the preview of Skyfall's score, I'm pleasantly surprised. Doesn't sound overly familiar, but enough Bond-esque moments alongside a couple of Newman's more signature style of scoring. Am really looking forward to Skyfall, despite despising Adele's awful title theme. I think we're looking at the highest grossing Bond ever for sure, and possibly even the first to pass 1bn? The buzz around this one seems really high at the moment, the trailers seem to be getting great reaction in cinemas and unless advance word of mouth is terrible, I cant see this doing anything other than amazing business. So, do we think Bond (either now or in future versions) has the ability to pass the 1bn mark?

C'mon, it has to be more interesting than debates about Craig's height, good looks or hair colour!

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."

If there is some f-bombing, i suspect it wont be from Bond. Be surprising to hear the reaction if it is Bond that starts dropping the f-bomb though. I seem to recall when License to Kill was released and it got some flack for being violent - wasn't it the first and only Bond film rated 15?

_____________________________

"I've got an idea for a special infiltration technique. It involves draining a man of his blood and replacing it with Tizer."